Originally Posted by urbanscribe

I have 30k miles on a DD P90D and have never gone once to a supercharging station. Once a month I go to a bar in Fairfield CT where I get 1.20$ back from my taxes on a municipal charge point and feel good about that.

Originally Posted by daveo4porsche

so how many barrels of oil does it take to run a Panamera vs. Tesla 100D for 13,500 miles (1 year) - ignoring renewables for the moment where EV's are stronger - let's just burn barrels of oil to power our cars…directly.

so here is the math as concisely as I can put it:

1 barrel of oil = 20 gallons of gasoline produced - each gallon of gas requires 6 kWh to refine.
EV's average 3.3 miles/kwh delivered to the battery - the mission-e/TEsla Model S 100D fit this profile
1 barrel of oil contains 1628 kWh of raw potential energy
Panamera according to Porsche is 24 mpg
oil fired power plants are 45% efficient,
the electrical grid is 93% efficient at distribution,
charging an EV is 95% efficient at getting power into a LiON battery


Panamera @ 24 mpg = 562.5 gallons of gasoline = @ 20 gallons of gas/barrel = 28 barrels of oil/year to run a Panamera 13,500 miles

Tesla Model S 100D @ 3.3 miles/kWh = 4090.90 kWh delivered to the battery required to drive 13,500 miles
13,500 miles / 3.3 miles/kWh = 4090.909 kWh required to drive 13,500 miles
4090.90 kwh / 647.25 kWh-barrel-o-oil = 6.32 barrels of oil to drive an EV 13,500 miles

Panamera @ 24 mpg = 28 barrels of oil a year to drive 13,500 miles + 3,375 kWh to refine each gallon of gas since gas refining uses 6 kWh of electricity during the refining process.
3,375 kwh @ 647.25 kWh-barrel-o-oil = 5.214 additional barrels of oil to run the Panamera for a total of 33.214 barrels/year of oil to run the Panamera

Tesla 100D running from a oil fired power plant = 6.32 barrels of oil a year delivered directly to the power plant and used to make electricity

I can't make the math any simpler - and I encourage you to find fault with the numbers - but the 10 year cost of running:

1 Panamera @ 24 mpg = 332.14 barrels of oil
1 Tesla 100D @ 3.3 miles/kWh powered by a 45% efficient oil fired power plant = 63.2 barrels of oil.

same 135,000 miles - one car takes 332 barrels of oil - and the other car takes 63.2 barrels of oil.

direct consumer cost to run the Panamera 135,000 miles @ $3.50 gallon = 562.5 * $3.50 = $1968.75
direct consumer cost to run the Tesla Model S 100D 135,000 miles @ $0.1254/kwh = 4090.90 kWh * $0.1254/kwh = $512.99

environmental cost
Panamera = 332.14 barrels of oil "burnt" to drive 135,000 miles
Tesla Model S 100D - 63.2 barrels of oil "burnt" at the power plant to drive 135,000 miles

please explain to me again how it's not more efficient to burn the oil in power plant and drive an EV, The math is clear and simple, and the conversion rates are correct and documentable.

I welcome correction.

Originally Posted by daveo4porsche

so how many barrels of oil does it take to run a Panamera vs. Tesla 100D for 13,500 miles (1 year) - ignoring renewables for the moment where EV's are stronger - let's just burn barrels of oil to power our cars…directly.

so here is the math as concisely as I can put it:

1 barrel of oil = 20 gallons of gasoline produced - each gallon of gas requires 6 kWh to refine.
EV's average 3.3 miles/kwh delivered to the battery - the mission-e/TEsla Model S 100D fit this profile
1 barrel of oil contains 1628 kWh of raw potential energy
Panamera according to Porsche is 24 mpg
oil fired power plants are 45% efficient,
the electrical grid is 93% efficient at distribution,
charging an EV is 95% efficient at getting power into a LiON battery


Panamera @ 24 mpg = 562.5 gallons of gasoline = @ 20 gallons of gas/barrel = 28 barrels of oil/year to run a Panamera 13,500 miles

Tesla Model S 100D @ 3.3 miles/kWh = 4090.90 kWh delivered to the battery required to drive 13,500 miles
13,500 miles / 3.3 miles/kWh = 4090.909 kWh required to drive 13,500 miles
4090.90 kwh / 647.25 kWh-barrel-o-oil = 6.32 barrels of oil to drive an EV 13,500 miles

Panamera @ 24 mpg = 28 barrels of oil a year to drive 13,500 miles + 3,375 kWh to refine each gallon of gas since gas refining uses 6 kWh of electricity during the refining process.
3,375 kwh @ 647.25 kWh-barrel-o-oil = 5.214 additional barrels of oil to run the Panamera for a total of 33.214 barrels/year of oil to run the Panamera

Tesla 100D running from a oil fired power plant = 6.32 barrels of oil a year delivered directly to the power plant and used to make electricity

I can't make the math any simpler - and I encourage you to find fault with the numbers - but the 10 year cost of running:

1 Panamera @ 24 mpg = 332.14 barrels of oil
1 Tesla 100D @ 3.3 miles/kWh powered by a 45% efficient oil fired power plant = 63.2 barrels of oil.

same 135,000 miles - one car takes 332 barrels of oil - and the other car takes 63.2 barrels of oil.

direct consumer cost to run the Panamera 135,000 miles @ $3.50 gallon = 562.5 * $3.50 = $1968.75
direct consumer cost to run the Tesla Model S 100D 135,000 miles @ $0.1254/kwh = 4090.90 kWh * $0.1254/kwh = $512.99

environmental cost
Panamera = 332.14 barrels of oil "burnt" to drive 135,000 miles
Tesla Model S 100D - 63.2 barrels of oil "burnt" at the power plant to drive 135,000 miles

please explain to me again how it's not more efficient to burn the oil in power plant and drive an EV, The math is clear and simple, and the conversion rates are correct and documentable.

I welcome correction.

Originally Posted by dgjks6

So to my original point. A Tesla is your only car? How does it do in the winter?

Originally Posted by daveo4porsche

and for the record we don' have to get rid of all ICE forms of transportation - there are applications/use cases for which EV and their foreseeable offspring will never match some of the more extreme capabilities of ICE"s - however if we can simply change the mix and only use ICE in use cases where their advantages are requirements (long distance rapid refueling for example) and use EV's for mundane daily chores it's win win win win

picture a world where the available supply of gasoline is being targeted/used in the applications its best suited to handle, and the stupid idle ICE engine in daily commute traffic is replaced with clean source electricity and EV's where zero emissions in congested high density areas is an improvement…

ICE's don't need to die, they just need to be more targeted in their use case so we maximize the benefit of using that particularly expensive form of fuel/transporation - and we can use EV where they are best suited - it would be a better world all around.

think of the "Mix" people, use the best tool for the job! Tesla Model S to drive to/from the track - mmmmmmm flat -6 NA 500 HP 9250 rpm ICE Monster to flog round the track ;-) burn baby burn!!! Can you say GT3 track toy - I knew you could!!!

Originally Posted by urbanscribe

Not in Europe, Asia or RoW. Which is where it matters for P development roadmap.

You're massively underestimating non US resource poor industrialized countries determination to move off fossil and the cost curves of the products involved.

Certainly, yes, for the US (and amusingly Russia) with protectionism, govt picking winners and losers, tarifs on solar panels, denials etc it may take 50 years for it to hit your back yard. But to think that that applies to the rest of the world is not realistic.

Originally Posted by matttheboatman

Shame on you Matt!

At only 52 years young, I can't believe it has taken me this long to realize that we are witnessing the mega shift from combustion to electric vehicles. If Porsche did not need to sell existing technology to dealers and customers they would stand on the hilltop and scream - "Forget everything you think you know about cars!"

My prediction: An E-Porsche will succeed beyond anyone wildest imagination. I'd bet the farm on it if I had not already spent the money buying cool Porsches.

Originally Posted by urbanscribe

Hybrids are not an equilibrium solution. They are a transition product. Long term a car with two different inter connected power trains is going to be exponentially more expensive to maintain.

Originally Posted by cometguy

Agreed. But a nice and fun short-term product!